Talk:Comparisons with other vampires
The problem I have with the current title of this article is that it states that it is a "comparison" presumably with vampires from other myths. The article we have at present is simply a listing, FAQ-style, of information about FK vampires, not one that compares FK vampires with, say the vampires of Dark Shadows, the vampires in the White Wolf Publsihing books, or even the vampires of the Anita Blake novels. I think we need to have one of two things happen. Either we need to rename the page to something more appropriate to the current information or we need to begin inserting some basic information (I'd prefer it not to be huge) about how FK vamps compare. The danger in #2 is that the other vamp information base is huge. We could pick any genre and come up with examples. Though....now that I think about it, we could take option #3...it might be possible to word some of this in such a way as to make other vampire information more prominent without actually detailing tons. For example, "Unlike other fantasy novels1" and then footnote those genres or novels in which a particular fact is canon.--Kodia 19:21, 14 August 2008 (UTC) :Both. We do need an article with a FAQ listing of the characteristics of FK vampires. But there is certainly also a place for comparisons of just the kind you mention. I don't know if that's option 3, exactly, but I'd bet there are those who would like to do serious comparisons. :Actually, that suggests to me that an annoted FAQ page is the way to go now (option 3), with the possibility of eventually having a whole Comparisons category, with a page for comparisons with Anita Blake, another for comparisons with Buffy, and so on. :In that case, this page would be turned into the main page for the Comparisons Category, with each note including links to the individual pages where comparisons exist. :Not for now, maybe; but something to consider for the future. — Greer Watson 22:41, 14 August 2008 (UTC) Okay good. I think it is sort of option three, to be honest. My biggest beef with bad wiki page design is that a lot of people use unnecessary headings. The pages are meant to be articles. If a heading only has one or two sentences under it the writer should really think about why they're putting the heading there in the first place. The vast majority of the time, they're not necessary and can be incorporated into something that's far more readable that maintains the true spirit of wiki articles (which should read like encyclopedia articles more often than not). The FAQ is one of those special cases, though. The headings very clearly mimic the questions (or the subheadings do if the questions are grouped). If we end up with an FAQ that leads to other main articles, that's great. That's exactly what we should be aiming for, I think.--Kodia 00:36, 15 August 2008 (UTC)